Israeli soldiers gang rape Palestinian detainee

[Forevernever24]

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/israelis-protest-arrest-of-soldiers-accused-of-gang-raping-gazan-detainee/3288825#

You can find a sanitised version in Western media outlets that replaces the word rape with abuse but this is the ugly truth of how Israeli soldiers treat Palestinians and how some of the Israeli mainstream excuse it.

Israel has a major problem with its far right who are quickly becoming the mainstream and unless it gets control it will continue to sink lower and lower in the eyes of the world losing all moral credibility. To excuse rape and call rapists heroes with some high ranking politicians and media outlets screaming that what these men did was justified. Open your eyes. No god, no religion, no political ideology, no one with a prick of humanity can condone gang rape. But I am sure I will see genocide apologists defending it on here.

The Palestinian man was a civilian who was being held without charge but regardless is shoving a stick up someone * repeatedly so that they lose the ability to walk anything other than savage barbarity. Disgusting.

Do you not think it's depressing that a majority of respondents didn't think rape warrants criminal investigation and consequences?

Break international law but make it ✨ethical✨ seems like something the most moral army in the world would say they are doing to be fair.

I think there's a systemic issue worldwide with rape not being acknowledged or prosecuted, with very little justice for the victims.

Do you not think two pronged questions are a bit ambiguous and difficult to answer? There've been issues throughout the conflict with ambiguously phrased survey questions asking Palestinians, Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs more than one thing in the same question and bias-confirming extrapolations made from that.

I (and presumably most people unless they're military) don't know what the investigation, prosecution process or outcome would be if it went through the military court as opposed to criminal court but I imagine they'd be much the same and I hope there will be serious consequences.

I'd find the question pretty easy to answer, actually.

And military and civil proceedings will be very different and have different consequences. This is widely known. A military investigation will not be impartial or independent. It will give weight to partisan issues, be more likely to justify behaviour which would be considered criminal in civil society, and have milder consequences. A non-military victim will almost certainly not receive justice through a military disciplinary process which primarily asks: did the soldier break a rule or disobey a direct order, and then tries to find a way to tell them not to do so again. In this case, the defence would be fairly straightforward in a military framework that includes senior people supporting the use of rape and sexual assault. Worst case, a perpetrator might lose their job and get a short sentence. More likely, slap on the wrist and re-assignment.

I'd find the question pretty easy to answer, actually.

Of course- it's much easier and less complicated when you're safe and far away.

I obviously don't have as much in depth knowledge as you of how military courts work nor the ability to see into the future, so I'll continue to hope the victims see justice served.

Currently they’re under house arrest. I’ve 0 faith that they’ll be punished as they deserve. A non idf member would be rightly in prison unlike them

Yes. And the Military Advocate could still file it with the criminal court anyway, which is likely, with evidence.

The INSS survey question says The military prosecutor recently asked to extend the detention of the five soldiers suspected of severe abuse and clarified that there is further evidence strengthening the suspicions against them which would imply it's being taken seriously and will be prosecuted accordingly.

"It's much easier and less complicated when you're safe and far away"... Well, the bombs and gunfire and hunger and illness are harming and killing people I care about deeply and have destroyed a society some of my friends gave their lives trying to protect and build. Former colleagues have been executed, others tortured. Friends have had to evacuate their homes. There are people I care about, who I don't know if they're alive or dead. I have people I care about in both Palestine and Israel. Geographically, yes, I'm far away - but watching this happen to people and a place I love is far from easy.

I'm still able to find it pretty easy to say that international law and ethical standards matter.

They’re under house arrest. With their families and friends nearby. I don’t take this too seriously. Unless every person thar has raped in Israel is under house arrest whilst there is an investigation going on.

It's always easy to miss the detail when you're busy trying to demonise a whole country's people.

True.

I'm still able to find it pretty easy to say that international law and ethical standards matter.

So am I. I'm also safe and far away and that wasn't the question that was asked in the survey. I don't know how I'd answer the actual question as I haven't personally had the experience of trying to maintain ethical values and obey international law when under attack from an enemy that does neither.

How is it a difficult question to answer?

We aren't fools.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2022-12-22/ty-article/watchdog-under-1-of-israel-army-probes-yield-prosecution/00000185-39de-d5e1-a1e5-7ffe453f0000

Especially with regards to this case the "strong evidence" includes video that the soldiers recorded and shared......

I did clearly say it isn't when you're safe and far away.

I also said it's presumably a more difficult question to answer when you're under attack from extremely unethical terrorists who don't obey international law. Maybe I phrased it badly and you couldn't understand what I was saying.

How is it a difficult question to answer, though? If you think it may be more difficult to answer under certain circumstances, what is it about those circumstances that you think would change how you might answer?

The people killing my loved ones aren't obeying international law. I've been in situations where people have not been obeying international law in their desire to hurt or kill me and others. If timings had been different, I might well be there now. That hasn't changed my answer, so I'm genuinely interested in the perspective of someone who thinks it would change theirs.

It's getting a bit weird that you keep asking the same question when I've already answered it. If you genuinely still can't grasp a different perspective from your own at this point I'm not sure what can be done to help.

You don't seem to have explained why you think that way; rather, you've just said you think it might be different. I'm interested in what would be different. How would those circumstances potentially change your decision-making process?

Jeezo this is painful. You'll be asking her for a presentation with flip charts next!

She's already made her point, and very clearly, which was perfectly reasonable IMO.

If you have a presentation with charts prepared, I'd be happy to hear it, especially when the issue being discussed is such an important one. Do you think obligations to adhere to international law should be conditional? What conditions would negate those obligations for you, and why? Or are these international laws standards which should apply universally?

You're wasting your time with people trying to defend and justify the unjustifiable.

Ironically the argument as to why we shouldn't judge someone in a certain situation as to how they respond to survey is the very reason why the military should not be anywhere near the investigation into these rapists and it should be done in an independent court of law to ensure a fair trial and judgement.

Armies are Incapable of prosecuting themselves imo. Look at the U.K. army too. Violent men thrive on being in a pack. They use sexual violation of various kinds from rape to ‘banter’ to bond.

I hope it is not too derailing to explain this with an article in the Guardian about sexual abuse in the British Military Forces. Perhaps someone knows of something similar about the IDF.

Women told the inquiry about the “broken” complaints system. “They waste time until you run out of energy,” says Laura, whose complaint took a year. “They lied for each other, reports went missing, it was complete tosh.” Officers she made complaints against were subsequently promoted.

^Serving personnel and veterans told the inquiry about intimidation, obstruction of witnesses, evidence lost “to save the unit’s reputation” and being “career-fouled” and sidelined. In the name of operational efficiency and “the needs of the badge”, a CO could decide that an alleged perpetrator was too valuable to the unit to punish, erasing a complainant’s right to justice.
“The MoD constantly refers to ‘a few bad apples’,” says lawyer Ahmed Al-Nahhas, who has handled military claims for over 15 years. “That’s garbage. It’s systemic and [the MoD] knows it. Some younger officers want to do the right thing but they don’t get plaudits for resolving a complaint that is viewed as creating more work … especially when the chain of command is implicated in the bad behaviour.”^
From the Guardian
www.theguardian.com/society/2023/dec/24/it-was-a-hunting-ground-women-and-sexual-assault-in-the-uk-armed-forces

Just realised I posted this in the wrong thread

Meir Mazuz, top Israeli rabbi favored by Netanyahu and his cabinet, blesses soldiers that gang-raped a Palestinian abducted from Gaza: "You beat the enemy, so what? It's all good… Don't we have the right to do it?… In any other country, they'd get medals… Don't fear the goyim"

https://x.com/davidsheen/status/1832362225052307581